Round 8 - GMC Call for Bounty Applications - Deadline is January 14

Grants / Bounties
,
1

This thread is for applications for Rocket Pool’s December 10, 2023 - January 28, 2024 bounties. Please only post grant applications in this thread. If you would like to discuss and/or ask questions about any applications you see in this thread, we ask that you do so in this separate forum thread (link) which has been established for all community discussions related to this round of applications. Only those grant applications that are posted in this thread and timestamped by January 14, 2024 at 23:59 (11:59 PM) UTC will be considered. Any bounties posted after that deadline will be carried over to the next grant period.

This is the expected schedule for round 8:

  • Application Period (December 10th - January 14th)
  • Application Discussion Meetings - one for each subcommittee (January 18th - January 19th)
  • Negotiation Period (January 18th - January 23rd)
  • Scoring Deadline (January 23rd)
  • Final Voting Amendments, Discussion and Finalization (January 24th - January 26th)
  • Award Announcement (January 28th)

Please note the following differences between grants and bounties. Grants are intended to be applied for by those who are wishing to carry out the work themselves. Bounties are open-ended goals that could be met by anyone, including those other than the proposing party. In other words, if I believed that Rocket Pool needed a fifty-foot paper mache orange rocket for publicity purposes and I wanted to be the one to built it, I would apply for a grant. If I instead thought Rocket Pool needed a fifty-foot paper mache orange rocket for publicity purposes but I wanted it to be open to whoever built it first to claim the reward (similar to a prize), then I’d apply for a bounty.

To guide you in your application, the GMC has established the following goals and the following scoring rubric:

GMC Goals

Grants, bounties, and retrospective awards should make it easier and/or more attractive to do one or more of the following:

become a node operator

operate a node, mint rETH

hold or use rETH

improve the quality of life for the protocol and its community.

Bounty Rubric

When evaluating grant applications, the GMC takes into account the following goals:

If the bounty is completed successfully, to what extent does it further the GMC goals?

To what extent is it likely that the bounty can be feasibly claimed/completed successfully?

If the bounty is successfully completed, how large is the benefit to the protocol relative to the size of the proposed costs?

Bounty Application

Please copy paste the template below into a reply. Answer the questions there, feel free to remove or add sections based on relevance. Be sure to replace the data in the benefits table column with your answers.

## Name of Bounty

### What is the nature of the proposed bounty?

### Must the results of this project be entirely open source ([MIT](https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT), [GPL](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html), [Apache](https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0), [CC BY](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

## Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate

| Group | Benefits |
|---|---|
| Potential rETH holders | If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help people looking to stake ETH for rETH? |
| rETH holders | If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help rETH holders? |
| Potential NOs |  If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help people looking to run a Rocket Pool node for the first time? |
| NOs | If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help people already running a Rocket Pool node? |
| Community |  If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help the Rocket Pool community? |
| RPL holders |  If the bounty is successfully completed, how does this help RPL holders? |

### What other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?

### Will the results of the completed bounty be open source?

## Work and Verification

### What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty? Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere?

### How long is the proposed bounty available for? Is it awarded to the first team to successfully claim it, or is it in some way divided among all such successful claims in the proposed availability period?

### Who will test any products submitted for claiming the bounty?

### What is the acceptance criteria for awarding of the bounty?

## Payment

### How much USD $ is the applicant requesting for successful completion of the bounty?

### Is the applicant requesting RPL or LUSD?

## Conflict of Interest

### Does the person or persons proposing the bounty have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the successful completion of the bounty).

### Will the applicant, or any protocol or project in which the applicant has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the bounty is successfully completed?
2 Likes
2

Rocket Layer - The Rocket Pool Eigenlayer Integration

What is the nature of the proposed bounty?

Enable Rocket Pool node operators to join the Eigenlayer network. This should be done while Rocket Pool retains senior debt, meaning Rocket Pool contracts are the withdrawal credentials from the beacon chain. The aim is for Rocket Pool node operators to participate in Eigenlayer activities and be slashed for misbehavior.

Must the results of this project be entirely open source (MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

Yes, it will be fully open source.

Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate

Group Benefits
Potential rETH holders This integration would enable greater throughput of rETH from the increased increased node operator demand, hopefully bringing rETH closer to its peg, rather than at a premium
rETH holders The rETH holders will benefit from being able to delegate to operators within the Rocket Pool ecosystem inside of Eigenlayer. Currently, there are no options to do so, only professionals and solo stakers.
Potential NOs This integration would be a massive incentive for individuals looking to start staking. Rocket Pool is one of the easiest ways to start and those looking to join Eigenlayer as node operators will likely consider Rocket Pool for the smart node’s UX over running a solo node to join Eigenlayer.
NOs Individuals already running a node will gain the option to join the Eigenlayer network. Depending on what AVSs are available, this can expose the node operator to various new earning options. It’s important to also consider the risks involved. Operators will be using novel DeFi tech which inherently carries risks of smart contract bugs. This being said, I believe it is better that we give node operators the agency to make that decision for themselves in a way that protects Rocket Pool.
Community N/A
RPL holders The integration should increase the TVL of Rocket Pool and indirectly increase the value of RPL.

What other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?

Eigenlayer stands to gain as a result of this integration. The Rocket Pool node operator set is massive and would quickly scale the number of node operators they had if we were able to join. This would likely improve Eigenlayer’s marketability. Further, many dApps are looking to build on top of Eigenlayer and may choose to offer AVS services to Rocket Pool node operators. These dApps in turn would benefit from the increased pool of node operators.

Will the results of the completed bounty be open source?

Yes

Work and Verification

What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty? Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere?

Design:

  • Point RP withdrawal address
  • Keeper network informs of minipool count changes
  • Keeper network informs of RP penalties
  • Ability to force exit - you want to be able to do that ASAP after RP penalties (you don’t have as much collateral) or Eigenlayer penalties (you don’t want RP penalties to supersede you)
  • You’ll remain vulnerable to simultaneous penalties forever
  • Their slasher and escrow stuff should work just fine for ETH; just pass the RPL through for ease, or consider using that as slashable too for efficiency

Work:

Stage 1: Build

  • Smart contract to point the RP stuff at – mostly will be just like the solo one except for
    • not giving full value to the validators
    • pod already handles multiple validators, here it’s just packaged per node – might be a couple for loops to swap
    • boot or revalue stuff based on keeper
      • make keeper scripts in python or similar

Stage 2: Audit cycle

  • complete an audit with feedback implementations with a reputable auditing firm discussed and coordinated with the GMC
  • coordinate with the team at Rocket Pool and Eigenlayer for broad comments on the design and technicals

Stage 3: UX/ presentation

  • Web page needs to handle the new thing you can add to a pod - for simplicity make it so a pod is either all solos or one RP node
  • documentation needs to be written so that users can understand the steps of the process a la the Rocket Pool documentation

How long is the proposed bounty available for? Is it awarded to the first team to successfully claim it, or is it in some way divided among all such successful claims in the proposed availability period?

This bounty should be available for 2 months. During this period of time, any number of individuals can claim their intent to submit an MVP of the smart contract to the GMC for consideration. Applicants are encouraged to signal earlier so that cooperation is possible. Once the first submission is received, a 2 week window will begin in which others can submit their own MVP for consideration. At the end of the 2 week period, a single team will be awarded the 1/3 prize. The winning team can optionally then reserve the entire bounty for completion.

Who will test any products submitted for claiming the bounty?

The product should be tested considerably by the applicant before being presented to the Rocket Pool core team, ideally Kane and a senior engineer from Eigenlayer. Further, a reputable 3rd party auditing firm should be engaged with the coordination of the GMC and the bounty applicant. The costs of this audit should be covered by the GMC.

What is the acceptance criteria for awarding of the bounty?

This is a multistep bounty and so the acceptance criteria for each stage is as follows.

1 - Build the outlined contract to allow Node Operators to register with Eigenlayer and function like regular validators in their network including slashing. This ought to be verified with a core RP team member, ideally Kane, as a plausible solution.

2 - Incorporate feedback from the audit and the Eigenlayer team. Then, in coordination with RP and Eigenlayer, release the integration for public use.

3 - Create proper front end components as well as documentation to make the product easy to use and understand.

Payment

How much USD $ is the applicant requesting for successful completion of the bounty?

I believe the impact of this integration for the TVL and general value of Rocket Pool is immense. I’ve written on this topic elsewhere but generally I believe that Eigenlayer is one of, if not the only way, to exogenously increase the realized value of Rocket Pool. We can do internal upgrades to make rETH more efficient and node operation more attractive, but Eigenlayer is the first time that the Rocket Pool network can be used for new tasks. Further, I believe this is not a negligible task. The effort involved includes going through an audit cycle which can be extensive. I believe 3 months of work for a sr software engineer is a reasonable estimation of the time required for this project, or roughly 30-50k USD, split up over the checkpoints outlined above.

I believe 1/3 at each point is reasonable.

Conflict of Interest

Does the person or persons proposing the bounty have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the successful completion of the bounty).

I have no conflicts to report. Sreeram and I have chatted on occasion over the years. @Valdorff helped with some of the work/verification sections.

Will the applicant, or any protocol or project in which the applicant has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the bounty is successfully completed?

No.

11 Likes
3

Apologies in advance if this is not the right forum to discuss what @jasperthegovghost had mentioned.

“This should be done while Rocket Pool retains senior debt”. Is this even technically feasible? Doesn’t EigenLayer mandate withdrawal addresses set to their EigenPod addresses for it to be considered as “economic security” by EigenLayer?
If EL eigenpods are withdrawal addresses, any risk to EL will jeopardize RP. It feels like an either/or for withdrawal addresses.
Am I missing something basic here?

4

Hello Rocket Pool community,

Brianna here from EigenLabs. I’m really excited about the opportunity to dive into this project with all of you. This feels like the beginning of not just a project, but a fantastic journey together. It’s not every day you come across a chance to work on something that could really shake things up, and I’m really excited for this one.

With this proposal, I see a chance for us to pool our talents and make something great. I’m already brimming with ideas and can’t wait to see what we can create together. It’s about more than just the here and now; it’s about laying the groundwork for future collaborations that could really push the envelope.

Looking forward to what we can accomplish together and to all the potential projects on the horizon!

Best, Brianna

2 Likes
5

@KentuckyFC @brianna Please limit commentary to the designated thread here:

Thank you.

6

Non-custodial Staking as a service

What is the nature of the proposed bounty?

Allnodes are great – it’d be better to have one or more competitors out there. In a worst-case scenario, the RP validators could act as part of a cabal or self-slash to grief. Limiting that set is useful. Note also that allnodes has quite a lot of stake, eg from Lido.

It need not be identical. For example, it could require running something very lightweight on a home computer, which could be run on a primary machine (as opposed to dedicated hardware).

Must the results of this project be entirely open source (MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

Not necessary, but cool.

Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate

Group Benefits
Potential rETH holders Lowers one potential tail risk.
rETH holders Lowers one potential tail risk.
Potential NOs Competition in this space can essentially only be good for NOs. Disparate features would let them choose based on preference, or perhaps they apply price pressure?
NOs Competition in this space can essentially only be good for NOs. Disparate features would let them choose based on preference, or perhaps they apply price pressure?
Community Having less centralization in this vector better fits the RP ethos IMO.
RPL holders Given that part of our value is our brand, strengthening it in this way is likely to be beneficial to RP and RPL.

What other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?

The hypothetical project itself. And maybe other pools (eg, Stader), since the project could add support.

Will the results of the completed bounty be open source?

Need not be.

Work and Verification

What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty? Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere?

Allnodes is the successful current example. I don’t think we should go by exact featureset so much as usage for rewarding.

How long is the proposed bounty available for? Is it awarded to the first team to successfully claim it, or is it in some way divided among all such successful claims in the proposed availability period?

This funds just one iteration, but I’m probably cool with funding more here. We don’t need 50, but 3-5 would be sick.

For each of the 2 milestones, I’d suggest one winner.

Who will test any products submitted for claiming the bounty?

No testing specified – the proof is in the pudding here based on usage.

What is the acceptance criteria for awarding of the bounty?

  • Must be non-custodial (can have validator key shared, but not node wallet or withdrawal wallet)
  • Graffiti must label the users of the service

Milestone 1: 10 users and 100 minipools
Milestone 2: 5% the size of allnodes (within RP) – measured by block proposals across a week

Payment

How much USD $ is the applicant requesting for successful completion of the bounty?

Milestone 1: $20k
Milestone 2: $60k

This is not at all meant to be enough. The service should charge and self-sustain. This is a bonus to make it a little more attractive, and a show that the RP community wants this.

Is the applicant requesting RPL or LUSD?

RPL? If bounty-doer wants LUSD and we have it, we should probably accommodate?

Conflict of Interest

Does the person or persons proposing the bounty have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the successful completion of the bounty).

I use Allnodes and like them. I help on their discord.

Will the applicant, or any protocol or project in which the applicant has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the bounty is successfully completed?

Nothing significant.

7

Treegen Testing Support

What is the nature of the proposed bounty?

Creating an independent implementation of treegen, and supporting testing for each new tree spec.

This is a refresh of an earlier bounty. That one covered 2 specs, and the second is ~ready to be claimed. I think funding 2 specs ahead is sensible.

Must the results of this project be entirely open source (MIT, GPL, Apache, CC BY license or similar)? If not, which parts will not be, why, and under what license will they be published?

It’s highly encouraged, and supported by the payment split.

Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate

Group Benefits
Potential rETH holders Errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol.
rETH holders Errors in disbursement could cause rETh holders to lose rewards. Additionally, errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol.
Potential NOs Errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol.
NOs Errors in disbursement could cause NOs to lose rewards. Additionally, errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol
Community Errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol.
RPL holders Errors in disbursement would damage trust in the protocol.

What other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?

None

Work and Verification

What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty? Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere?

The claimant SHALL make an independent version of treegen following the new spec but NOT following the new code from the RP dev team.

The claimant SHALL work with the RP dev team to confirm matching and/or track down the root causes of differences seen.

Yes, a previous iteration was claimed.

How long is the proposed bounty available for? Is it awarded to the first team to successfully claim it, or is it in some way divided among all such successful claims in the proposed availability period?

The reward should be split up amongst all valid claimants.

Who will test any products submitted for claiming the bounty?

The product is test work, there is no specific output.

What is the acceptance criteria for awarding of the bounty?

There are 2 criteria:

  • The spec is live
  • The RP dev team members working on this (likely @jcrtp or @fornax) is asked who both created an independent implementation and actively supported testing

Payment

How much USD $ is the applicant requesting for successful completion of the bounty?

$1500 per spec, committing to funding two specs at this time (could get two BA##### bounty numbers if that’s easier to track)

For simplicity, rewards SHALL be evenly split amongst those that met the criteria, with open source treegen implementations being given twice the weight when splitting.

Conflict of Interest

Does the person or persons proposing the bounty have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the successful completion of the bounty).

No

Will the applicant, or any protocol or project in which the applicant has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the bounty is successfully completed?

No

1 Like
8

Notice: This message marks the closing of the eighth round of Rocket Pool bounty award applications. Any applications submitted after this will not be considered for this round. The GMC will announce the award recipients in a new thread here on the forums around January 31st. The community will then have two weeks to issue any challenges before funds are disbursed. Thank you to all who applied and thank you to everyone who has followed along. Anyone who would like to comment on existing applications is encouraged to do so in this thread.

10

Hey Jeff from the community here, I think this is more complex than what is outlined here.

Trying to understand from a user perspective:

  1. How will this impact rETH? This means rETH APY will also increase? Can rETH users opt out of restaking exposure?
  2. Wouldn’t rETH be more risky than other LSTs for that matter?
  3. What are the risks of pointing rocketpool eth withdrawal addresses to 3rd parties?
  4. Assuming AVS rewards are in volatile ERC20s, how do we plan to pass that to users if at all?
11

Most of the discussion is happening in this thread [ link ]

12

The discussion is happening in this thread [ link ]